- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jessica Chambers jury says Not Guilty, but 7 say Guilty on Poll. Chaos in the courtroom
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:33 pm to ThatMakesSense
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:33 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Really though the jury has deliberated for 10 hours or so on a man's life. Is the prosecution and evidence that weak or the defense that great?
The jury I was on deliberated for about 5 hours on a pretty open/shut murder case. You want to be thorough.
0
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:35 pm to GeauxldnGurl
quote:
I don't understand how they came back with not guilty. Even if they didn't understand unanimous, do they also not realize that 7 is more than 5?
Eh, they probably just misunderstood the whole thing.
It isn't that hard to see the possible confusion.
You must be unanimous to find a man guilty. "Oh gee, we only have 7, that means not guilty then" was probably the thought.
We know they must be unanimous both ways but it is easy to see the foul up, because they know for certain at 7 he isn't "guilty" either. ie hung jury is essentially "not guilty" to a layman in the broad sense. At least in the moment.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:40 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
I think you're right.
In the video link, it appeared that they handed the judge a piece of paper from a legal pad. Don't they get a verdict form to fill out?
In the video link, it appeared that they handed the judge a piece of paper from a legal pad. Don't they get a verdict form to fill out?
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:42 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
Eh, they probably just misunderstood the whole thing.
It isn't that hard to see the possible confusion.
You must be unanimous to find a man guilty. "Oh gee, we only have 7, that means not guilty then" was probably the thought.
We know they must be unanimous both ways but it is easy to see the foul up, because they know for certain at 7 he isn't "guilty" either. ie hung jury is essentially "not guilty" to a layman in the broad sense. At least in the moment.
I'd almost be willing to bet that as the foreman (or forewoman) was preparing the notices of having reached a verdict another juror was saying "we have to be unanimous either way and we aren't, we aren't done yet"
that juror now has a big case of the I-told-ya-sos
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:43 pm to Teddy Ruxpin
quote:
You must be unanimous to find a man guilty. "Oh gee, we only have 7, that means not guilty then" was probably the thought.
We know they must be unanimous both ways but it is easy to see the foul up, because they know for certain at 7 he isn't "guilty" either. ie hung jury is essentially "not guilty" to a layman in the broad sense. At least in the moment.
There is no way they put this much thought into it. You are given written instructions on how a verdict is decided as well as how to ask for evidence if you want to review it. There are 12 incompetent people deciding someones life. Unbelievable. Unless they all cannot read, which is an option being from MS.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:43 pm to Gris Gris
quote:
In the video link, it appeared that they handed the judge a piece of paper from a legal pad. Don't they get a verdict form to fill out?
I'm trying to remember if I had a form to fill out. I was in LA. Pretty sure I did, but I had to write out a bunch of stuff free hand as the foreman, and I was nervous I was going to mess that up.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:44 pm to thelsutigers
quote:
There is no way they put this much thought into it.
quote:
You must be unanimous to find a man guilty. "Oh gee, we only have 7, that means not guilty then" was probably the thought.
This doesn't require that much thought. Its just requires getting ahead of yourself.
People mess up legal principles all the time. Allllllll the time. I could make a career out of fixing contract language you learn 1L year.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:48 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
Many dying declarations are in similar circumstances, the law sees them as reliable enough to allow them as an exception to hearsay.
I think he was referring to her physical condition - a combustible liquid was poured into her mouth and throat and set on fire. Under those conditions, I doubt she was speaking clearly.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:50 pm to HaveMercy
(no message)
This post was edited on 4/15/23 at 5:22 am
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:51 pm to Gris Gris
quote:
In the video link, it appeared that they handed the judge a piece of paper from a legal pad. Don't they get a verdict form to fill out?
Would it be surprising if they used note book paper and sticky notes in Mississippi as official court documents.
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:52 pm to HaveMercy
It just gets even more bizarre. This is will be a mistrial.
Now a gift of cotton is involved. Either giving by the judge or one of the investigators.
Now a gift of cotton is involved. Either giving by the judge or one of the investigators.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:54 pm to Ted2010
Expelled from the county? For inquiring about a cotton stalk? Wow.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:55 pm to Sao
quote:
Expelled from the county? For inquiring about a cotton stalk? Wow.
Reward more than punishment.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:56 pm to rt3
The amount of stupid on display in the comments of that video is astounding.
...and shows you (along with this jury verdict) how ignorant your average american is of our judicial system.
I mean FFS this is Basic Civics 101 people.
...and shows you (along with this jury verdict) how ignorant your average american is of our judicial system.
I mean FFS this is Basic Civics 101 people.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:57 pm to ThatMakesSense
I needed this judge when I divorced my ex-wife.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:58 pm to Ted2010
Its like going back in time reading that article
Posted on 10/16/17 at 3:59 pm to Sao
They are going to screw this thing into a mistrial.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:01 pm to tigerpimpbot
quote:
Its like going back in time reading that article
Indeed. Pretty stupid shite going on in that place.
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:03 pm to Ted2010
BATESVILLE - The jury charged with deciding the fate of Quinton Tellis, the man accused of setting 19-year-old Panola Country resident Jessica Chambers afire and burning her to death in 2014, is deadlocked.
Circuit Judge Gerald Chatham declared a mistrial this afternoon.
Tellis can be tried for the crime again but that decision is up to prosecutors. Link
Circuit Judge Gerald Chatham declared a mistrial this afternoon.
Tellis can be tried for the crime again but that decision is up to prosecutors. Link
This post was edited on 10/16/17 at 4:06 pm
Posted on 10/16/17 at 4:07 pm to Ted2010
So the headline of that article declares that the judge gave a cotton stalk to a reporter, but then admits in the article that he did not give her the cotton - a deputy did.
Why not change the headline?? Geez that whole article is stupid.
Why not change the headline?? Geez that whole article is stupid.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News